Talk:Angra Mainyu (disambiguation)
(disambiguation) Why would the pages has a (disambiguation) and the term itself redirects here? seems ike a total waste of good page name to me. Oh and there's no category. BLUER一番 00:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC) :I think any term that could have more than one distinct meaning should have a disambiguation page. It's better than having to tease multiple meanings from a conglomeration page. I stuck a template at the bottom to generate the disambiguation category footer, but I probably used the wrong name for the template (don't know why it wouldn't be disambiguation though) :I honestly prefer having the title itself redirect to the disambiguation page. If you don't do that you have to stick a disambiguation notice at the top of every page in the disambiguation list, and that is ugly for the first thing you see, and it's a lot of hassle to maintain. Because this wiki is more detailed than Wikipedia, I think it's informative to go to a disambiguation page first for a non-qualified page title. --Yksehtniycul 11:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC) :PS: I would say Ahriman should redirect to the same page. And if an author wants to send the reader to the Nocturne boss, a fully qualified title like Ahriman (Nocturne) should be used. Anyway, Angra Mainyu is a fairly diffused subject in Megami Tensei discussion. But I think the wiki would be more readable if all articles were structured this way more or less. I don't think all devils should be differentiated this way. But I do think the Ahriman in Nocturne is different than a recurring devil. I also think something like Kerberos (Devil) should be a valid redirect eventually. :I also think the wiki should use the word devil much more broadly. The fact that Atlus USA says demon, is like localizing Pokemon in the states and not using the word Pokeman (because Pokemon happens to be the title of a cultural boogeyman and associated with Pokemon worship!!) ...anyway, we could afford to be more mature than Atlus USA. --Yksehtniycul 11:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC) ::I agree with terms with multiple meanings becoming a disambiguation page. Another practice I see done in certain wikis is instead of just some mundane disambig page, they expand it into what is called the "parent page". What the parent page does is to give summaries on the multiple meaning, and then link to the separate meaning via a "main" template. Maybe you could consider we use that approach? ::And it seems to me tagging the article title with a "(disambiguation)" and then sticking the "disambig" template at the bottom feels redundant. The tag is kinda misleading; it may lead some to think there is an "Angra Mainyu" article, when in fact that term was redirected to "Angra Mainyu (disambiguation)". ::I suggest we do what Wikipedia never did, which for "Angra Mainyu (disambiguation)" is to move it to "Angra Mainyu", dropping the (disambigation) tag and append the "disambig" template at the bottom of the article. ::In any case, I agree that Angra Mainyu isn't something discreetly covered in MegaTen, much like Moirae Sisters. ::PS: Maybe I don't know much but isn't Pokémon the localized brand and shortening from Japan's Poke'tto '''Mon'suta...? I don't get it? '''BLUER一番 16:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC) :::I was inclined to drop the (disambiguation) as well, but I actually think it has major value. Because it let's the reader know straight up this is not an information article... it's a crossroads so to speak. And in any case, personally I'm of the strong feeling every page should more or less be followed by something in parenthesis (and if it isn't -- it's subject to being redirected to a disambiguation page.) :::I don't have any outside experience with this, but I think the idea of a wiki that completely documents an evolving subject matter is fundamentally different from what Wikipedia is doing. In Wikipedia there is very much such a thing as "too much informatin", and studies show editors spend more time deleting stuff not considered important enough than adding stuff. Our mission here is the opposite, so you'd expect it to unravel a little differently, and the only cogent solution I can think of is to put parenthesis in just about every official page (so might as well do it on a disambiguation page as well) ...so in other words, think of a link without parenthesis as a soft link. --Yksehtniycul 10:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :::PS: This will be better organized as well, because disambiguation pages will go in that category, and redirect pages will go in that pseudo category. --Yksehtniycul 11:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :::FYI: Also Pocket Monsters seems to be something else (based out of the states) according to Wikipedia. But you probably know more about Pokemon than I (I'm sure it is an "abbreviation" for that however) ...Point is though Digital Devil is a brand. Like a Pokemon is. Even though it isn't so hammered in so much, because the games are designed for adults more or less. --Yksehtniycul 11:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC) ::::I'm going to put the (disambiguation) back for now, because you broke some links I made (I wish redirects were more infinite) --Yksehtniycul 11:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :::::Sounds like we're just making things complicated when it comes to treating disambiguations. All we could do is just add the template. With Wiki Magic the page will be automatically categorized under the "disambiguation page category" when the disambiguation template is appended. Trust me, it works simpler this way and has been done across wikias. We want users to come in and edit, don't we? BLUER一番 11:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :::::EDIT: Broken links? I was going to fix them. BLUER一番 11:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :::::EDIT: I fixed the links. But those pages probably could be better organized. I enjoy organizing things, so to speak ^^ BLUER一番 11:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC) ::::::I don't want to argue, but let it be known I feel strongly disambiguation pages should have parenthesis in the title. If there was a template at the top it wouldn't seem as bad, but that template is just wasting screen space, and it would be confusing to see what is going on in the changlog. At any rate, no more disambiguation pages until everyone can come to a consensus. ::::::I think proper usage should be, if a link is not fully qualified in parenthesis it should either be considered subject to correction, or it should be seen as a link designed to educate a reader that doesn't know what a term means on the uses of that term.--Yksehtniycul 11:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :::::::We could create a style page to discuss on our disambiguation approach and find a middle ground from there. BLUER一番 11:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC) Parent Pages By "parent pages" do you mean using the subpage syntax? With a colon, or some organizational pattern? I think we probably could use a navigational system of some kind, but subpages in main articles seems overkill. The only place I could think to stick it would be in an information box that floats to the right, the way Wikipedia links regional mythology and other stuff together.--Yksehtniycul 11:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :Not in the literal and syntax sense, no. The "parent page" is "created" when there's use of the "main" template. BLUER一番 11:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC) Table of Contents I could be wrong, but I don't recall ever seeing a disambiguation page on wikipedia with a ToC. Presumably because the page should be as much like a ToC as possible, so an actual ToC is just redundant (and makes the page harder to read/navigate from on landing) I think the reason this is so, is because disambiguation pages are not supposed to use headings. But I think we can use them as long as we use . --Yksehtniycul 11:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC) :Well, that's conflicting. First you considered not following Wikipedia's practise on disambiguation, now you're citing Wikipedia in the case of TOC. BLUER一番 11:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC) Ahriman=Angra Mainyu Why then not fuse the page? it's the same god of the Zoroastrianism... HakuNoKaemi 08:26, August 21, 2011 (UTC)